Simple analysis.

[Rostov]

Current US position in the world, as the only superpower, gives it "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights to stir world interests for it's own benefits or purposes.
Today US also faces a large number of obstacles, and the number keeps growing.

Do you agree, or don't agree with this analysis? Would you elaborate on it?

[Firetxmi]

This smells of summer school essay topic. :D

[Lambert58]

Current US position in the world, as the only superpower, gives it "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights to stir world interests for it's own benefits or purposes.
Today US also faces a large number of obstacles, and the number keeps growing.

Do you agree, or don't agree with this analysis? Would you elaborate on it?

the US isn't the "only superpower"
nor does the US have, or has ever had, "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights of any sort.

you should be kicked in the nuts just for posting this drivel.

[BloodyTalon]

Current US position in the world, as the only superpower, gives it "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights to stir world interests for it's own benefits or purposes.
Today US also faces a large number of obstacles, and the number keeps growing.

Do you agree, or don't agree with this analysis? Would you elaborate on it?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=j0B7bzP-Gog

[Rostov]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=j0B7bzP-Gog

nice try Talon, now try to defend your point instead of just posting a link.

[Rostov]

the US isn't the "only superpower"
nor does the US have, or has ever had, "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights of any sort.

you should be kicked in the nuts just for posting this drivel.

US is the strongest superpower--how is that?

Going into iraq without a UN concent is an "unofficial" right.

[Lambert58]

US is the strongest superpower--how is that?
Um... I was quoting you.



Going into iraq without a UN concent is an "unofficial" right.

actually, Iraq had violated 16 UN sactions, genius:

UNSCR 678
UNSCR 686
UNSCR 687
UNSCR 688
UNSCR 707
UNSCR 715
UNSCR 949
UNSCR 1051
UNSCR 1060
UNSCR 1115
UNSCR 1134
UNSCR 1137
UNSCR 1154
UNSCR 1194
UNSCR 1205
UNSCR 1284

Do your research then come here and act like a dumbass. Nitwit.

Not to mention the innumerable SAM sites we destroyed (I saw the classified daily target reports) from 92-98 In Iraq. It's not like they were sitting there quietly....

[BloodyTalon]

nice try Talon, now try to defend your point instead of just posting a link.
Fine; your assumptions that the EU is the Roman Empire in disguise and that the US has "'unwritten' or 'unofficial' rights' to do whatever the hell they want are bull****, and are either desperate attempts to get us to do your schoolwork for you, loaded questions meant to spout your own opinion more than open up debate, or a sign that you are under the influence of a certain popular recreational drug. Seriously, are you trying to outdo Lee or something?

Now as for your question, we have done nothing special that other countries havn't done before even in recent history. The UN does not rule the world with an iron fist, and as a result countries can choose whether the heed their demands or not. Nevertheless, they are still subject to any consequences of their actions and we're no different in that respect. For example, the consequence for the US going into Iraq unilaterally is that we have to bear the burden of the majority of the war and public opinion of us overseas dropped significantly.

[SkyUS]

Current US position in the world, as the only superpower, gives it "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights to stir world interests for it's own benefits or purposes.
Today US also faces a large number of obstacles, and the number keeps growing.

Do you agree, or don't agree with this analysis? Would you elaborate on it?

Mp.net isn't your HW service.

[Rostov]

Um... I was quoting you.




actually, Iraq had violated 16 UN sactions, genius:

UNSCR 678
UNSCR 686
UNSCR 687
UNSCR 688
UNSCR 707
UNSCR 715
UNSCR 949
UNSCR 1051
UNSCR 1060
UNSCR 1115
UNSCR 1134
UNSCR 1137
UNSCR 1154
UNSCR 1194
UNSCR 1205
UNSCR 1284

Do your research then come here and act like a dumbass. Nitwit.

Not to mention the innumerable SAM sites we destroyed (I saw the classified daily target reports) from 92-98 In Iraq. It's not like they were sitting there quietly....


i rephrased my point of view in the first sentence.... but you still dont get it.

UN did not allow US to enter Iraq no matter how many sanctions have been violated.

[Power_serj]

What school do you go to and what is your teacher's name? I'm going to have to tell that you are cheating and conspiring to plagarize from internet forum users.

By the way, the UN is a joke. China, France as well as some other European countries were involved with Iraq in the Oil for Food scandal, thus they would never vote for war with Iraq. Iraq's disregarding of the UN resolutions was blantant, therefore force was justified, although it proved to be a bad move. Make sure you put that in your paper. You can cite this website and put Serj, Power as the source. kthxbai.

[Rostov]

Fine; your assumptions that the EU is the Roman Empire in disguise and that the US has "'unwritten' or 'unofficial' rights' to do whatever the hell they want are bull****, and are either desperate attempts to get us to do your schoolwork for you, loaded questions meant to spout your own opinion more than open up debate, or a sign that you are under the influence of a certain popular recreational drug. Seriously, are you trying to outdo Lee or something?

Now as for your question, we have done nothing special that other countries havn't done before even in recent history. The UN does not rule the world with an iron fist, and as a result countries can choose whether the heed their demands or not. Nevertheless, they are still subject to any consequences of their actions and we're no different in that respect. For example, the consequence for the US going into Iraq unilaterally is that we have to bear the burden of the majority of the war and public opinion of us overseas dropped significantly.


UN does not rule with an iron fist, but it does represent the world opinion.
There is nothing equally powerfull enough that could replace UN as the opinion of the world, almost as a whole body. And there have been attempts to diminish its power by making it look ineffective.
The United States officialy has a rank of the most respected nation within the body of the United Nations, and no respectable nation within the UN would disagree with the UN as a whole. This is where lose of respect happened.

US is the dominant power in the world economy, this is common sense by the way. This power also lets US have "special" rights-- to manipulate economy in its own interest.



Whats wrong with doing schoolwork with someone else? If you feel engaged in the discussion, than that is all that matters, you are not being exploited.

[deagle]

i'd be nice to know your POV before solicitation from others (that is, assuming you have a POV).

your simple thread title, asking for a simple analysis only requires but a simple answer, which is simply ....... with great power comes great responsiblity to use those powers/resources, which isn't that easy. perhaps we should be a bit more isolation and fix our problems first, but if there's an opportunity to assert our power, its only natural to do so. you simpleton.

[Rostov]

Make sure you put that in your paper. You can cite this website and put Serj, Power as the source. kthxbai.

I bet you are serious too.
Ok ill do it.

[Rostov]

i'd be nice to know your POV before solicitation from others (that is, assuming you have a POV).

your simple thread title, asking for a simple analysis only requires but a simple answer, which is simply ....... with great power comes great responsiblity to use those powers/resources, which isn't that easy. perhaps we should be a bit more isolation and fix our problems first, but if there's an opportunity to assert our power, its only natural to do so. you simpleton.

so you simply agree with what i said?

[Rostov]

i'd be nice to know your POV before solicitation from others (that is, assuming you have a POV).

there is no central point of view, you can look at each sentence, in the original topic, as a point of view of its own. and what i am looking for is confirmation or denial of those points of view. while confirmation is always good, denial or rejection also add to the process of developing the point of view.

[LaoSexMachine]

Current US position in the world, as the only superpower, gives it "unwritten" or "unofficial" rights to stir world interests for it's own benefits or purposes.
Today US also faces a large number of obstacles, and the number keeps growing.

Do you agree, or don't agree with this analysis? Would you elaborate on it?


Every country acts for it's own benefits. US just has a lot of "tools" at it's disposal. Besides everyone pays attention to the big guy on the block but not the little one who is doing the same thing.

[deagle]

as a global superpower, we hold ourselves to the highest standards whenever possible. when talks stall, action is demanded. we have the fortitude to go in and address the issue. sometimes management screws up, but its easy to watch the world criticize when they play passive or minimal roles. "unofficial" methods may be employed b/c enemies don't play with same level of highest standards, and exploit this.

[0rphie]

Is Iraq the only country in violtion of UN resolution? Do other such countries get invaded too?


Um... I was quoting you.
actually, Iraq had violated 16 UN sactions, genius:

UNSCR 678
UNSCR 686
UNSCR 687
UNSCR 688
UNSCR 707
UNSCR 715
UNSCR 949
UNSCR 1051
UNSCR 1060
UNSCR 1115
UNSCR 1134
UNSCR 1137
UNSCR 1154
UNSCR 1194
UNSCR 1205
UNSCR 1284

Do your research then come here and act like a dumbass. Nitwit.

Not to mention the innumerable SAM sites we destroyed (I saw the classified daily target reports) from 92-98 In Iraq. It's not like they were sitting there quietly....

[seraosha]

Is Iraq the only country in violtion of UN resolution? Do other such countries get invaded too?

Do they have oil?

[Hilbert]

US is the strongest superpower--how is that?

Funny how you've just contradicted the statement you made that I quoted second to the bottom of this post.


Going into iraq without a UN concent is an "unofficial" right.

I reject this idea that the U.N. grants the "right" to do something having said that, screw it. The only quarrel I have or had with the situation is that we went in without a Constitutional Declaration of War, but we're so far involved at this point that it doesn't really matter anymore so we might as well finish what we started.



UN did not allow US to enter Iraq no matter how many sanctions have been violated.

They didn't stop us either.


UN does not rule with an iron fist, but it does represent the world opinion.

That's debatable; quite frankly, the UN is bloated and overblown I don't even give a damn about anymore -- I'm actually ashamed my country is a member of the damn organization.


There is nothing equally powerfull enough that could replace UN as the opinion of the world, almost as a whole body.

Good, the last thing we need in this world is two United Nations.


And there have been attempts to diminish its power by making it look ineffective.

What power is this you speak of anyway? The power to "grant" authority for action? People take action anyway and I don't see the U.N. stopping them and I hardly consider the U.N. as having some divine power to tell countries what they can or cannot do, or rather they already pretend to and do just that so I simply don't acknowledge it. As far as being ineffective... I don't deny that it's been a great help in promoting the "enviable" cause of global socialism.


The United States officialy has a rank of the most respected nation within the body of the United Nations, and no respectable nation within the UN would disagree with the UN as a whole. This is where lose of respect happened.

My country has a rank of the most respected nation within the body of the United Nations? ****, I thought Iraq would've fixed that that problem. All sarcasm aside, I'm not sure whether to be flattered or insulted... or both.

As far as your statement that "no respectable nation within the UN would disagree with the UN as a whole." That's debatable and entirely your opinion, voicing an opinion as an established fact is nothing more than a sign of arrogance. Quite frankly, I'm glad we disagree with the UN on a number of things; I only wish we did it more often on a much grander scale. For all I care the UN can take all of it's global beauracracy and shove it and while their at get their damn headquarters out of my country.


US is the dominant power in the world economy, this is common sense by the way. This power also lets US have "special" rights-- to manipulate economy in its own interest.

Might doesn't equal right Goofus, it may mean that noone can stand up to you or stop you but it doesn't equal right.



Whats wrong with doing schoolwork with someone else? If you feel engaged in the discussion, than that is all that matters, you are not being exploited.

So tell me kid, what grade and subject did you fail?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Oh my. Rostov, you're entitled to your opinion of course...but if that opinion is based upon some of the statements you've made, then that opinion doesn't stand up well to inspection IMO.



UN did not allow US to enter Iraq no matter how many sanctions have been violated.

It is not for the UN to "allow" anybody to do anything. Sovereign nations do not require the UN's consent, and every nation retains the right to defend itself via waging war.


UN does not rule with an iron fist, but it does represent the world opinion.

That may or may not be true - bearing in mind that much of the world still lacks indoor plumbing.



There is nothing equally powerfull enough that could replace UN as the opinion of the world, almost as a whole body. And there have been attempts to diminish its power by making it look ineffective.

The UN looks ineffective because it is ineffective. If the UN had been effective, and done its' job, and performed the WMD inspections as prescribed by the GW1 cease-fire agreement, there would have been no need to conduct them by force after an invasion. The breakdown of the UN's credibility (oil for food, failure to manage the cease-fire etc.) is what precipitated the Iraq invasion, it wasn't something that happened afterwards.



The United States officialy has a rank of the most respected nation within the body of the United Nations, and no respectable nation within the UN would disagree with the UN as a whole. This is where lose of respect happened.

The US holds no such rank within the UN. The US has been hated and vilified by many nations for decades. Others have only towed the US line during the cold war because they were depending upon the US for defense. The UN has never been of one mind.



US is the dominant power in the world economy, this is common sense by the way. This power also lets US have "special" rights-- to manipulate economy in its own interest.

You're confusing "rights" with "abilities". Every nation seeks to manipulate matters for it's own benefit - the fact that the US may have the ability to do it more effectively is simply a reflection of it's abilities, not any rights enumerated somewhere.